Matt Skelton v Dillian Whyte

Bey also went from 84 to 94 without beating a fighter with a winning record. That is not even Chisora level.

 

Bugner had a nice comeback at that time. His streak over page, Tillis and bey was a good effort for a man his age and who had been a multiple time retiree. He even gave an ok effort in losing to Bruno. But the Povetkin who beat whyte was still very much a force when they fought. Alexander was extremely disciplined to staying in shape and a skilled fighter. He wasn’t prime by any means and whyte getting KOd by an aged contender did him no favors. But he won the rematch promptly and emphatically and has for the most part been consistent about winning actively against decent opposition. I think he’d beat a lot of the fringe guys of the 80s. The upper tier of course should be heavily favored though.

 

The above is absolutely no justification for completely making up and assigning a false narrative, to other posters' views.

The statement I have made re Bugner '87, doesn't hype up Whyte, by mere virtue of it being an assertion, with which you disagree. And so, equally, it does not require you to deliberately mischaracterize my posts or anyone else's posts, which do not align with your own view.

Let's not forget - You are citing Bruno's win over Bugner (along with McCall and Coetzee), as better than any of Whyte's wins.

My counter-statement argues against that. And, let's face it, all you have done to counter back on that statement, is to aim at and highlight the lowest-end of Whyte's ledger, of the last 5 years.

Bravo.

Let's say I give you Wach and Browne and entertain the idea of Bugner '87, as the favorite in these fights, which is quite reasonable. What is that saying about the Bugner of 1987 really?

It isn't a good case for him being a better scalp than anything on Whyte's resume, is it?


Let's actually take a look at Bugner's second comeback and try and ignore for a minute that they were, at some point in the past, recognizable names. Because, I do wonder if you actually watched any of Bugner's comeback fights, in '86/'87.

Prior to this second comeback, Bugner had slumped off into retirement again, in '84 (during his failed first comeback) when he became the most notable name in Steffen Tangstad's 'W' column. It was also an awful fight to watch.

The new generation of heavyweights he left behind, at that time (including "Tillis, Bey and Page") had fallen well, well short, with most of them at the desperate end of their own careers - in that these guys were never going to be making an impression on the world scene again.

Since 1984...

Page had gone 3-3 and was getting KD'd and scraping by the likes of a totally out of shape James Broad.
It was well known that page was in poor form and unfit going into the Bugner match. People were calling for his retirement afterwards. That's how bad Page was and he went nowhere, thereafter.

Bey had gone 1-3, managing only a MD win against 3-9-1 Wesley Smith, in that time. He had developed a reputation for turning up in poor shape by then, but was particularly so for Bugner, after having been easily outpointed by Smith the fight before. The bout with Bugner in '86 is, at best, utterly nondescript.

Tillis had gone 2-4, mustering a couple of wins over 9-8-0 Mark Young and 1-0 Art Terry, before facing Bugner. The kicker in this one is that there's a case for Tillis having beaten Bugner, which would have derailed the latter's second comeback before it got off the ground, had the decision not gone to him.

It's probably worth noting that all of Bugner's comeback fights, during this time, prior to Bruno, took place in his new home country of Australia, with only one US official, if I recall correctly, ever being allowed to take part in the proceedings.


Bugner '87 was not only a guy who was 37 years old and at least 20lbs overweight, but he was more or less a shot fighter, who was getting by guys, who themselves were more or less done. His few, 10-round decision wins, showed very little workrate, very little movement, no sharpness, no power or anything remarkable, other than Bugner was a tired fighter, with stamina issues, who could spoil, lean and survive ten rounds and ship a fair bit of leather in the process.

When he met Bruno (who had been on a return himself), Bugner was never in it, bar his bullrushing, holding and leaning. Frank, rather uncharacteristically, took his time, jabbing away at a Bugner, who had left any ideas he might have had on beating Bruno, either in the dressing room, the gym, or anywhere, pre-1980.

Is there a case for Bugner '87 beating Wach and Browne? Of course there is. But I bet you anything you like these would be relatively competitive bouts that would easily go a 10-round distance and, should the 12-round distance be on the table, well - who knows?

 

Bump. Skelton-Whyte.

 

Whyte is that bad that it's a legit difficult fight to call when Skelton was at his peak.

 

Skelton is so sloppy he makes Whyte look like a technician in comparison!

Tough guy though, with a awful gas tank. Didn't Skelton's biggest accomplishments come in the kickboxing ring?

 

Whyte ud or late tko